The road to 205 - Help Wanted (community)

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

The latest issue of the 9th Scroll is here! You can read all about it in the news.

  • The road to 205 - Help Wanted (community)

    As you may know, in a few months the rules in the rulebook will be frozen for several years. This means that any typo, any wording that is not streamlined, any overly complex or clunky wording that we do not discover until then will be here to stay and will make it into the printed rulebooks :/ . RCT (the Rules Clarity Team) will obviously do everything in their power to reduce these to a minimum, but since many eyes see more than a few ;) , we'd like to ask all of you for your help and make us aware of any issues that need to be fixed before the rules are frozen.

    Some of you have already been working on stuff like that in the Improving the Rulebook texts thread, and that thread has already helped us fix a lot of stuff in the rulebook. In order not to miss anything (or at least as little as possbile ;) ), we'd like to apply a more 'structured' approach now. This may change as we move ahead, also depending on how good this cooperation works out (there will also be similar threads in some internal forums), but this is what the plan looks like at this point:

    Every week, we'd like to ask you (as well as different T9A teams) to scrutinise a predetermined chapter (or in case of shorter chapters, a few chapters) of the rulebook. There will be a dedicated "Chapter(s) of the Week" thread in which we'd like to collect your feedback. What is important to note is that we are talking exclusively about changes to the wording and layout of rules texts (and of course typos and wording inconsistencies), not about the actual rules themselves! So we can change the wording and make rules more comprehensible, but we cannot change any rules!

    And this is how we would like your feedback to look like:

    - please always include the heading of the rule which you would like to report, e.g. "3.C.b Contact between Objects".

    - in case you find a typo, something that should be capitalised but isn't or vice versa, a wording inconsistency etc., please mark it as follows (this is an actual typo currently present in the rulebook :) ) :

    20.B.7 Distributing Hits onto Combined Units
    When an non-Close Combat Attack hits a combined unit, there are two possibilities for distributing hits

    - please refrain from discussions in the "Chapter of the Week" threads - otherwise we might lose track of the actual suggestions. If there is something you support, just like the post. And in case you disagree, we'll provide you with a discussion thread where things can be, well, discussed ;) (any discussions in the "Chapter of the Week" threads will be moved to that discussion thread).

    - in case you think a certain rule is overly complex, clunky, incomprehensible, etc., please explain shortly why you think that this is the case, or which part is ambiguous and how it might be misinterpreted. You do not need to provide us with a proposal how to fix it. In case you do wish to do so (and we appreciate it if you do), it is very important that you make sure you colour-code anything you alter in the current rules.

    I'll open the first thread shortly. If you have any general questions, questions regarding procedure, suggestions, etc., feel free to post in this thread.
  • Just a short clarification:

    Whenever there is a deadline mentioned in one of the Chapters of the Week threads, this does not mean that we will not accept any feedback after it has passed. It's quite the contrary - we'll continue working on all chapters until 205 is released.

    So in case you find anything noteworthy in any of the previous Chapters of the Week, please don't hesitate to post in the corresponding thread!